alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of State

          - [Public Notice: 11466]

# AGENCY:

Department of State.

# ACTION:

Notice of release of the Department of State's FY 2019 Service Contract Inventory.

# SUMMARY:

Acting in compliance with Section 743 of Division C of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2010, the Department of State is publishing this notice to advise the public of the availability of the FY 2019 Service Contract Inventory. The FY 2019 Service Contract Inventory includes the FY 2019 Planned Analysis, and the FY 2018 Meaningful Analysis.

# DATES:

The inventory is available on the Department's website as of July 9, 2021.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Marlon D. Henry, Management and Program Analyst, A/EX/CSM, 202-485-7210,                         *HenryMD@state.gov.*

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The inventory was developed in accordance with guidance issued by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Office of Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP). The Department of State has posted its FY 2019 Service Contract Inventory at the following link:                     *https://csm.state.gov/​index2.html.*

Zachary A. Parker,

Director, Office of Directives Management, U.S. Department of State.

[FR Doc. 2021-15278 Filed 7-16-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4710-24-P
---

CERTIFICATION OF 
  CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICERPURSUANT TO
  18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
  AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Lorrie Ann Archibald, Chief Executive Officer of Merritt
  Ventures Corp. (the "Company"), hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
  1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
  that, to the best of my knowledge:

| | (i)  | the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of the Company,
        for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2003, and to which this certification
        is attached as Exhibit 32.1 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements
        of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended;
        and
| | ---- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |      |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                
| | (ii) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents,
        in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
        of the Company.                                                                                                                                                           

| | By:    | /s/ Lorrie Ann Archibald          
| | ------ | ----------------------------------
| |        | __________________________________
| | Name:  | LORRIE ANN ARCHIBALD              
| | Title: | Chief Executive Officer           
| | Date:  | September 24, 2004                

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the
  Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to the Registrant and will be retained
  by the Registrant and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
  its staff upon request.


This certification accompanies the Form 10-KSB to which
  it relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
  and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Registrant
  under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (whether
  made before or after the date of the Form 10-KSB), irrespective of any general
  incorporation language contained in such filing.

---
#### In the Matter of the Guardianship of Sonia S. Cintron, an Infant. Catholic Guardian Society Services, Respondent; Sonia Cintron, Appellant.

Orders, Family Court of the State of New York, New York County (Sheldon Rand, J.), entered on December 15, 1983 and June 11, 1984, respectively, unanimously affirmed, without costs and without disbursements. Application by appellant’s counsel to withdraw as counsel is granted. *(See, Anders v California,*386 US 738; *People v Saunders,*52 AD2d 833.) We have reviewed this record and agree with appellant’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous points which could be raised on this appeal. Concur&emdash;Kupferman, J. P., Sandler, Sullivan, Asch and Kassal, JJ.
Exhibit 99.2     CERTIFICATION OF
CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION
1350, AS ADOPTED
PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002  I, Michael J. Sophie, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that the Quarterly Report of UTStarcom, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the
quarterly period ended September 30, 2002 fully complies with the requirements
of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that
information contained in such Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material
respects the financial condition and results of operations of UTStarcom, Inc.   By:
  /s/ MICHAEL J. SOPHIEName:
  Michael J. SophieTitle:
  Chief Financial Officer
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D17-4326

_____________________________

JOSHUA JAMES SELPH,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Escambia County.

Thomas V. Dannheisser, Judge.

September 28, 2018

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

MAKAR, OSTERHAUS, and JAY, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
2

Andy Thomas, Public Defender, Joanna A. Mauer, Assistant 

Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
# C_2020095EN.01001401.xml

| 23.3.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 95/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.3.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 95/14

---

Appeal brought on 4 December 2019 by Susanne Rutzinger-Kurpas against the judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) delivered on 3 October 2019 in Case T-491/18, Vafo Praha v EUIPO — Rutzinger-Kurpas

(Case C-887/19 P)

(2020/C 95/14)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellant: Susanne Rutzinger-Kurpas (represented by: F. Lichtnecker, Rechtsanwalt)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Union Intellectual Property Office, Vafo Praha s.r.o.

By order of 11 February 2020 the Court of Justice (Chamber determining whether appeals may proceed) held that the appeal is not allowed to proceed and that Ms Susanne Rutzinger-Kurpas shall bear her own costs.

---
# C_2019363EN.01000701.xml

| 28.10.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 363/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.10.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 363/7

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de Primera Instancia No 2 de Nules (Spain) lodged on 9 July 2019 — Investcapital Ltd v FE

(Case C-524/19)

(2019/C 363/12)

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Juzgado de Primera Instancia No 2 de Nules

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Investcapital Ltd

Defendant: FE

Question referred

Must Article 7 of Regulation No 1896/2006 (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 be interpreted as meaning that, in European order for payment proceedings brought thereunder, it does not preclude courts from reviewing of their own motion any unfair terms in the contract under which the debt has arisen in accordance with Article 7 of Council Directive 93/13/EEC (2) on unfair terms in consumer contracts, particularly if the national court needs to carry out a prior examination of the contract in order to conduct that review?

---

(1)  Regulation (EC) No 1896/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 creating a European order for payment procedure (OJ 2006 L 399, p. 1).

(2)  Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts (OJ 1993 L 95, p. 29).

---
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### National Credit Union Administration

# TIME AND DATE: 

10:00 a.m., Thursday, July 22, 2021.

# PLACE: 

                        Due to the COVID-19 Pandemic, the meeting will be open to the public via live webcast only. Visit the agency's homepage (                        *www.ncua.gov*) and access the provided webcast link.                    

# STATUS: 

This meeting will be open to the public.

# MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

1. NCUA's 2022-2026 Strategic Plan.

2. Request for Information and Comment, Digital Assets and Related Technologies.

3. NCUA Rules and Regulations, Complex Credit Union Leverage Ratio.

# CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: 

Melane Conyers-Ausbrooks, Secretary of the Board, Telephone: 703-518-6304.

Melane Conyers-Ausbrooks,

Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. 2021-15456 Filed 7-16-21; 11:15 am]

BILLING CODE 7535-01-P
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

This certification is not to be deemed filed pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and does not constitute a part of the Quarterly Report of UTStarcom, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”).

 

In connection with the Report, we, Jack Lu and Edmond Cheng, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(i)                                     The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

 

(ii)                                  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

Dated: May 9, 2011

 
| By:    | /s/ JACK LU                                                |   |
|--------|------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   | Name: Jack Lu                                              |   |
|   | Title: Chief Executive Officer and President               |   |
|   |                                                       |   |
| By:    | /s/ EDMOND CHENG                                           |   |
|   | Name: Edmond Cheng                                         |   |
|   | Title: Senior   Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |   |

 

----
# C_2019357EN.01000302.xml

| 21.10.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 357/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.10.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 357/3

---

Appeal brought on 24 February 2019 by FV against the judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber, Extended Composition) delivered on 14 December 2018 in Case T-750/16, FV v Council

(Case C-188/19 P)

(2019/C 357/04)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: FV (represented by: É. Boigelot, avocat)

Other parties to the proceedings: Council of the European Union, European Parliament, European Commission

By order of 3 September 2019, the Court (Sixth Chamber) dismissed the appeal.

---
# C_2020371EN.01000902.xml

| 3.11.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 371/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.11.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 371/9

---

Judgment of the General Court of 15 July 2020 — Itinerant Show Room v EUIPO — Save the Duck (FAKE DUCK)

(Case T-371/19) (1)

(European Union trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark FAKE DUCK - Earlier EU figurative mark FAKE DUCK - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Relevant public - Similarity of the goods and services - Similarity of the signs - Global assessment of the likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2020/C 371/07)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Itinerant Show Room Srl (San Giorgio in Bosco, Italy) (represented by: A. Visentin, M. Cartella and B. Cartella, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: M. Capostagno, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Save the Duck SpA (Milan, Italy) (represented by: M. De Vietro, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 5 April 2019 (Case R 1117/2018-1), concerning opposition proceedings between Forest Srl and Itinerant Show Room.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the appeal; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the appeal;

| 2. | Orders Itinerant Show Room to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Itinerant Show Room to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 263, 5.8.2019.

---
# C_2020201EN.01002202.xml

| 15.6.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 201/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.6.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 201/22

---

Order of the General Court of 2 April 2020 — Thai World Import & Export v EUIPO — Elvir (Yaco)

(Case T-3/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Withdrawal of the opposition - No need to adjudicate)

(2020/C 201/32)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Thai World Import & Export Co. Ltd (Bangkok, Thailand) (represented by: S. Bénoliel-Claux, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Crespo Carrillo, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO intervening before the General Court: Elvir (Condé-sur-Vire, France) (represented by: M. Lhotel, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 2 October 2018 (Case R 319/2018-2) relating to opposition proceedings between Elvir and Thai World Import & Export Co.

Operative part of the order

| 1. | There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action. |
| --- | --- |

1.

There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action.

| 2. | Thai World Import & Export Co. Ltd and Elvir shall bear their own costs and shall each pay half of the costs incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO). |
| --- | --- |

2.

Thai World Import & Export Co. Ltd and Elvir shall bear their own costs and shall each pay half of the costs incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).

---

(1)  OJ C 72, 25.2.2019.

---
# C_2019280EN.01002902.xml

| 19.8.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 280/29 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.8.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 280/29

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Spetsializiran nakazatelen sad (Bulgaria) lodged on 19 June 2019 — Criminal proceedings against QR

(Case C-467/19)

(2019/C 280/40)

Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Spetsializiran nakazatelen sad

Parties to the main proceedings

QR

Question referred

Is case-law such as that at issue, which concerns the national law regarding the approval by the court of an agreement on the imposition of a negotiated penalty concluded between the prosecution and the defence, which provides for the consent of the other persons charged as a condition for the approval of such an agreement, and that that consent is required only during the trial stage of the proceedings, consistent with Article 7(4) of Directive 2016/343, (1) with Article 47 and Article 52 of the Charter, and with the principles of effectiveness and equality?

---

(1)  Directive (EU) 2016/343 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 on the strengthening of certain aspects of the presumption of innocence and of the right to be present at the trial in criminal proceedings OJ 2016 L 65, p. 1.

---
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 32

                 STATEMENT PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS
            REQUIRED BY SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of TB Wood's Corporation (the "Company") on
Form 10-K for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2004, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned hereby certify that to the best of our knowledge:

1.  The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of
    the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934; and

2.  The information contained in the report fairly presents, in all material
    respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


March 25, 2005  /s/William T. Fejes, Jr.  President and CEO
                ------------------------
                William T. Fejes, Jr.

March 25, 2005  /s/Joseph C. Horvath      Chief Financial Officer
                --------------------
                Joseph C. Horvath


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to TB Wood's Corporation and will be retained by TB Wood's Corporation
and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-1258 CALVIN J. WEBER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, Defendant - Appellee. No. 99-1259 CALVIN J. WEBER, Plaintiff - Appellant, versusUNITED STATES ARMY PERSONNEL SECURITY CLEARANCE FACILITY, Defendant - Appellee. Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Andre M. Davis, District Judge. (CA-98- 2375-AMD, CA-98-3907-AMD) Submitted: May 13, 1999 Decided: May 18, 19992Before WIDENER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Calvin J. Weber, Appellant Pro Se. Tamera Lynn Fine, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Calvin Weber appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment to the Appellees. We have reviewed the record andthe district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Weber v. United States Dep’t of the Army , Nos. CA-98-2375-AMD; CA-98- 3907-AMD (D. Md. Dec. 29, 1998). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Refugio GALLEGOS-VALDIVIAS, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 10-10296.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

*424Submitted June 15, 2011.*

Filed June 29, 2011.

Allison Marston Danner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Francisco, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Loren Dougherty Stewart, Federal Public Defender, San Francisco, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before: CANBY, O’SCANNLAIN, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Refugio Gallegos-Valdivias appeals from the 57-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for reentry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Gallegos-Valdivias contends, first, that the district court miscalculated or overstated his Criminal History Category when it imposed two points under U.S.S.G. § 4Al.l(d). Gallegos-Valdivias does not dispute that he was under a criminal justice sentence at the time that he violated section 1326; rather, he disputes the validity of that sentence. His argument fails because he cannot attack his state parole suspension or revocation collaterally in a federal sentencing proceeding. *See Unit*
      *425
      *ed States v. Burrows,*36 F.3d 875, 884-86 (9th Cir.1994).

Next, he contends that the district court’s statements at sentencing did not adequately address his various arguments in favor of a lower sentence. The record reflects that the district judge considered the parties’ arguments at sentencing and had a “reasoned basis for exercising his own legal decisionmaking authority.” *See United States v. Carty,*520 F.3d 984, 996 (9th Cir.2008) (en banc) (internal quotations omitted).

Finally, Gallegos-Valdivias challenges section 2L1.2(b)(l)(A)’s 16-level enhancement as unreasonable and lacking in empirical foundation and argues that its application in his case resulted in a substantively unreasonable sentence in view of the age of his triggering offense. These contentions are also without merit. Application of the enhancement “serve[d] the legitimate [Congressional] interest of deterring illegal reentry by those who have committed drug-related” crimes, *see United States v. Ruiz-Chairez,*493 F.3d 1089, 1091 (9th Cir.2007), and the Guidelines sentence imposed was reasonable under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) and the totality of the circumstances, which reveals a pattern of illegal reentry and drug crime, *see Carty,*520 F.3d at 993.

AFFIRMED.

**This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.